FRANKLIN AND AFTER

Grey River Argus, 11 August 1925, Page 7

FRANKLIN AND AFTER

PRESBYTERIAN MINISTER '8 VIEWS.

The following extracts have been taken from a letter, under the above Heading, addressed to an Auckland daily recently by the , Rev J. Lamb Harvey, of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church: — “The rejoicing among Government supporters over the result of the Franklin by-election is natural enough. But when the ‘New Zealand Tinies’ speaks of a stinging reproof to Ilollandism’ and the egregious Mr Wilford sneers at the ‘followers of Karl Marx,’ ns if that ended the matter, they slow a singular blind ness to the realities of the social situation. Their inference seems to be that if only Labour can be squashed, the country can sing, ‘All, all is well.’ The impartial student of social affairs, however, draws another inference. He XiODcludes that if 2,159 electors in a constituency like Franklin vote Labour, then there is a serious discontent with a system which permits unrestricted speculation i.i land and keeps labour in -i subordinate position. He concludes that Ilollandism and Marxism indicate that all is not well with the body politic. . < Politicians are living in a fool’s paradise 'f they do not recognise these causes of social discontent 966 seek to remove them.”

Answering critics in a further letter, the reverend gentleman says:—• “My letter was a protest against the smug complacency which assumes that because Labour has been beaten in a by-election, no attempt cieed be made to deal with the causes of social discontent. If over 2,000 electors in a naturally Conservative constituency express their dissatisfaction with things as they are, and if Labour can actually reach the saddle in Australia and (recently) in Britain itself, then only political ostrichcii will continue to think that nil is well. Take the land questioi. In a new country like this I ought to be able to say to my farmer friends in Scotland, or to their sons, working hard for a bare living(, ‘Come out here, where there is a fine climate, cheap laud and good prospects,’ But when I suggest tliis to New Zealand farmers, they reply, ‘Tell them to stay at home; they are better off where they are.’ As you yourself, sir, often point out. the Government is doing nothing to encourage such immigration and settlement. The fact is, of course, that we are cursed here with a system which, by permitting free speculation in land, has brought us almost to a standstill. Labour has its ‘usehold' policy. One can see objections to it, but where is the Government’s alternative policy, Then take the industrial. question. Labour everywhere is dissatisfied both with its status and its pay, and is, indeed, challenging the whole capitalist position. Has it no reason too? Wc churchmen are concerned in these issues, because it is the church’s business to sec society organised on a basis of justice and brotherhood. ’ ’